Labor Party Standing Committee thread: Endorsement voting

[Ѕenator Αverroës]

Nix, you realize the Labor Party voted to endorse me before Seatown intervened right?

No, I did not. I have to confess, I really have no idea what's going on here. But no one else seems to know either.

[Ѕenator Αverroës]

Checked back a few pages, and now I see what you're talking about. I believe Nathan referred to it as a "tentative endorsement." They also tentatively endorsed Tweed, no? Is it Oakvale's turn now? 20RP12? Who knows?

Anyway, I think that a lukewarm endorsement is worth very little to your campaign. That's why I commented.

[Senator Napoleon]

Checked back a few pages, and now I see what you're talking about. I believe Nathan referred to it as a "tentative endorsement." They also tentatively endorsed Tweed, no? Is it Oakvale's turn now? 20RP12? Who knows?

Anyway, I think that a lukewarm endorsement is worth very little to your campaign. That's why I commented.

I agree but I want my support in this party to be more than merely lukewarm whether it is first preferences or second preferences. I have been called moderate hero, neoliberal, other terms, and I have been nothing but an ally to all leftists regardless of party. I even offered Snowstalker the CJO position to give him a chance to rehabilitate a positive image for himself and he told me he was taking a break until June and declined. Then he restarted his presidential campaign. The Left is truly a dysfunctional joke right now which is why I think having this conversation will put us back on the same page, or at least get us to a point where we understand how critical winning this election is. I haven't subscribed to the partisanship I see from some so it is foreign to me but it can be resolved.

[Secretary Polnut]

If I can interject here as a non-Labor person here.

I haven't endorsed anyone, and I don't plan to for another couple of weeks, but one thing is ABUNDANTLY clear... not just our version of the right, but the extreme right are stronger and more motivated than ever.

The last election was a sign how important it is that the left is united. Now, I mean 'united' as in preference flows. Regardless of where your first preference goes, where your second and third preferences go will be important.

That also means endorsing someone who will be able to make all progressives comfortable. Endorsing a candidate that you cannot insure against leaking preferences is a recipe for disaster.

[Senator Snowstalker]

I suggest you endorse either Napoleon or Oakvale. Tweed is too radical.

[asexual trans victimologist]

Okay, I'd like to clear a few points up here:

1. This party never even tentatively endorsed Tweed. I tentatively endorsed Tweed because I was given to understand that he had a better idea of what he was doing than he did. There was, rightly, a rebellion within the party and I, I think rightly, backed down when I realized that I was wrong and most of the party was right.
2. I do, however, think that we should endorse Napoleon over Snowstalker for many of the reasons that have been articulated.
3. I haven't been present for this debate so far because I had finals and I'm currently at a hotel whose vaunted 'high-speed internet' is anything but. I apologize for the inconvenience and going forward I hope to be able to spend more time on this.
4. The Labor Party voted to endorse Napoleon. The only reason I described this as 'tentative' was because the turnout was piss-poor.
5. I like Tweed and get on well with him. This was (referring back to point 1) why I had endorsed him and asked for the party's support in doing so. However, at the current moment I do not believe that this is the way for Atlasia.
6. I have no intention to make the Labor Party an auxiliary of the Liberals but the simple fact is that Snowstalker as a Labor Party candidate sucks. Of course it's better to have a leftist elected as opposed to a rightist. Of course we should support the most leftist candidate we can. But I'm of the belief that whoever we end up endorsing should at least have a relatively stable personality and not have quit and then unquit the race, the party, Atlasia, any number of other things.

[Senator Napoleon]

I admire Nathan's ability to enter the thread and settle things with only one post while a good multi-member debate was going. It seems that every one collectively decide to step back and say "okay, that's that" as he demonstrated authority with a much lighter approach than the rest of us were taking. Very impressive.

[ModerateCoward]

...May I appoint you as Proctor to put together and declare an endorsement vote to be held over the next...shall we say, three calendar days (ending, perhaps, 12 am or 1 am on Monday)?....

Endorsement vote:
Napoleon
[]Yes []No
Young Tweed
[]Yes []No
Oakvale
[]Yes []No
Labor Endorsement order Preference(Only candidates that receive over 50% of the vote):
[]Napoleon
[]Young Tweed
[]Oakvale
Voting ends 6AM EST on Monday.

[oakvale]

This is exceedingly minor, but shouldn't candidates be in alphabetical order?

[ModerateCoward]

This is exceedingly minor, but shouldn't candidates be in alphabetical order?

This isn't an official election

[Fritz]

What about 20RP12?

[ModerateCoward]

What about 20RP12?

I didn't expect a lot of people voting to endorse him, but you can write him in.

[ZuWo]

Just one word about the last Senat at-large elections because I see that this topic has been brought up again and again: One very important reason why Labor only managed to get one single seat was the fact that many of your Liberal "friends" chose to give their first preference to Andrew instead of your candidates. Had more members of the Liberal Party actually cared about that left-wing solidarity that they now demand from you, you would have at least 2 at-large Senators now.

[IDS Legislator Alfred F. Jones]

Endorsement vote:
Napoleon
[X]Yes []No
Young Tweed
[]Yes []No [X]Abstain
Oakvale
[X]Yes []No
Labor Endorsement order Preference(Only candidates that receive over 50% of the vote):
[1]Napoleon
[3]Young Tweed
[2]Oakvale

Sorry, Oakie!

[Emperor SJoyce]

What about 20RP12?

I didn't expect a lot of people voting to endorse him, but you can write him in.

He's the only Labor ticket running in a Labor election; I'd expect him to be on the ballot. (Napoleon is Liberal/IB, Oakvale is two independents, Tweed is CPoA/ELF, Clarence is Whig/IB, RP is Independent/Labor).

[hawkeye59]

Endorsement vote:
Napoleon
[X]Yes []No
Young Tweed
[]Yes []No [X]Abstain
Oakvale
[X]Yes []No
Labor Endorsement order Preference(Only candidates that receive over 50% of the vote):
[1]Napoleon
[3]Young Tweed
[2]Oakvale

[Californian Tony]

Endorsement vote:
Napoleon
[X]Yes []No
Young Tweed
[X]Yes []No
Oakvale
[X]Yes []No
Labor Endorsement order Preference(Only candidates that receive over 50% of the vote):
[1]Napoleon
[3]Young Tweed
[2]Oakvale

[© Tweed the Younger]

1. This party never even tentatively endorsed Tweed. I tentatively endorsed Tweed because I was given to understand that he had a better idea of what he was doing than he did. There was, rightly, a rebellion within the party and I, I think rightly, backed down when I realized that I was wrong and most of the party was right.

this I do not like.  if I ran a contained and boring campaign like my opponents it would be easy to wear a veil of teflon, never make an error.  I will make errors!  but I will act, I am nebulous, not a formed commodity packaged for the June election.  try, fail, try again, it works, try again.  Permanent Revolution to Trotsky, 'Begin at the Beginning' from Lenin.

[Senator Snowstalker]

Napoleon

[X]Yes []No

Young Tweed
[]Yes [X]No

Oakvale
[X]Yes []No

Labor Endorsement order Preference(Only candidates that receive over 50% of the vote):

[1]Napoleon
[3]20RP12
[2]Oakvale

[Fritz]

My vote is to endorse the following, in this order:

1. Napolean
2. 20RP12
3. Tweed
4. Oakvale

[Secretary Polnut]

Just one word about the last Senat at-large elections because I see that this topic has been brought up again and again: One very important reason why Labor only managed to get one single seat was the fact that many of your Liberal "friends" chose to give their first preference to Andrew instead of your candidates. Had more members of the Liberal Party actually cared about hat left-wing solidarity that they now demand from you, you would have at least 2 at-large Senators now.

I'm impressed, trying a bit of boat rocking eh?

[GM Griffin]

Napoleon
[X]Yes []No

Young Tweed
[X]Yes []No

Oakvale
[X]Yes []No


[1]Napoleon
[2]Young Tweed
[3]Oakvale

[President Marokai]

Just one word about the last Senat at-large elections because I see that this topic has been brought up again and again: One very important reason why Labor only managed to get one single seat was the fact that many of your Liberal "friends" chose to give their first preference to Andrew instead of your candidates. Had more members of the Liberal Party actually cared about that left-wing solidarity that they now demand from you, you would have at least 2 at-large Senators now.

Honestly I completely agree with this, despite the fact that I'll be first preferencing Napoleon and have the most confidence in him of all the candidates, it always has bothered me that when it comes to "Left wing solidarity" all it really means is "support the centrist left." That being said, however? I don't see what this has to do with anything.

Also I'd just like to note I'm really happy that Nathan has backed off of his past support for Tweed, as I very nearly left the party when he did.


Napoleon
[X]Yes []No

Young Tweed
[]Yes [X]No

Oakvale
[X]Yes []No

Labor Endorsement order Preference(Only candidates that receive over 50% of the vote):

[1]Napoleon
[2]Oakvale

[ModerateCoward]

Endorsement vote:
Napoleon
[X]Yes []No
Young Tweed
[X]Yes []No
Oakvale
[]Yes [X]No
Labor Endorsement order Preference(Only candidates that receive over 50% of the vote):
[1]Napoleon
[2]Young Tweed
[N/A]Oakvale

[IDS Legislator Alfred F. Jones]

Why not Oakvale?